赫尼曼认为，病人服用大剂量“引症疗剂”，只会加重病情，故主张服用极度稀释的疗剂。他构思出一种稀释并震荡的技术，并认为这样能维持物质的治疗特性，同时消除其对人体之害。赫尼曼认为这个过程会激发和增强“治疗物质灵气般的治疗力”。[55]
1810年，他收集并出版了《治愈术工具论（英语：The Organon of the Healing Art）》（The Organon of the Healing Art）一书。此书完整记载他所发明的新治疗技术。1921年，该书出版第六版，仍为今日的顺势医师所用。
顺势疗法看着可怕的对抗疗法（Homeopathy watching horrors of Allopathy），1857年由Alexander Beydeman绘制。图中历史人物以及拟人化的顺势疗法观察著19世纪主流医疗行为的残酷。
19世纪：盛行以及早期的批评
顺势疗法鼎盛期为19世纪，1825年赫尼曼的学生-汉斯·布奇·葛兰（Hans Birch Gram）[63]将之引进美国。1835年美国第一间顺势疗法学院于成立，1844年美国顺势疗法研究院（英语：American Institute of Homeopathy）成立，整个19世纪，欧美一共有数十间顺势疗法研究院[64]。一直到1900年，美国仍有22所顺势疗法学院以及15,000名顺势疗法从业人员。[65]
不过即使在它最盛行的时期，顺势疗法依旧受到许多科学家及医生的批评。1843年，维多利亚女王的医师-约翰福布斯爵士（英语：Sir John Forbes）（Sir John Forbes）认为该疗法方剂极微小的剂量不止无效，甚至是“对人类理智的羞辱”[71]。詹姆斯·扬·辛普森（James Young Simpson）于1853年针对其疗法的高度稀释方剂表示：“无论是再强的毒药，其十亿分之一的剂量都不可能对人类甚至是苍蝇造成一丝影响。”[72]。19世纪的医师兼作家-老奥利弗·温德尔·霍姆斯也是顺势疗法的批评者，他于1842年发表了一篇标题为《顺势疗法及其类似的错觉（英语：Homœopathy and Its Kindred Delusions）》（Homœopathy and Its Kindred Delusions）[73]的评论文章。法国顺势疗法协会的成员发现，1867年时，欧洲某些重要的顺势疗法医生不再开立极低剂量的顺势疗法方剂，也不再为之辩护。[74]美国最后一所专门教授顺势疗法的学校，于1920年关闭。[67]
20世纪：复兴
根据学者 Paul U. Unschuld [de]和 Edzard Ernst（英语：Edzard Ernst） 的研究，德国纳粹政权对顺势疗法很有兴趣，并挹注大笔资金研究其机制，但始终没获得正面结果。[75]Unschld 指出顺势疗法从未在美国扎根，但却在欧洲人的思想中更加根深蒂固。[76]美国1938年的《食品、药物和化妆品法案（英语：Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act）》（由纽约参议员兼顺势疗法医生 Royal Copeland（英语：Royal Copeland） 发起）承认顺势疗法方剂为药物的一种。在50年代，美国仅有75名专门的顺势疗法从业人员[77]，但到了70年代中后期，顺势疗法卷土重来，相关产业业绩增长近十倍。[77]
有人将顺势疗法的复兴归功于希腊顺势疗法医师 George Vithoulkas（英语：George Vithoulkas），因为他在70年代进行了大量研究，来更新顺势疗法的适用情境并完善其理论与实践[78][79]，但 Ernst 和 西蒙·辛格 认为这次复兴与新时代运动的兴起有关[44]，Bruce Hood（英语：Bruce Hood） 则认为，这波流行可能是因为顺势疗法医师提供病人相对较长的看诊时间，以及人们“天然”产品的偏好，而顺势疗法方剂普遍被认为是天然的。[80]
非牟利组教育组织教育查询中心（Center for Inquiry，CFI）联同怀疑查询委员会 （Committee for Skeptical Inquiry，CSI），向美国食物及药品监督管理局（FDA）签名请愿，批评布瓦宏生产的药物欧斯洛可舒能标签及广告误导。加拿大的CFI呼吁觉得受顺势疗法所害的人联络他们。[204]
Tuomela R. Chapter 4: Science, Protoscience, and Pseudoscience. Pitt JC, Marcello P (编). Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Rational Changes in Science: Essays on Scientific Reasoning 98 (Springer). 1987: 83–101. ISBN 978-94-010-8181-8. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3779-6_4.
Ladyman J. Chapter 3: Towards a Demarcation of Science from Pseudoscience. Pigliucci M, Boudry M (编). Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press. 2013: 48–49. ISBN 978-0-226-05196-3. Yet homeopathy is a paradigmatic example of pseudoscience. It is neither simply bad science nor science fraud, but rather profoundly departs from scientific method and theories while being described as scientific by some of its adherents (often sincerely).
ref name="Hahnemann">Hahnemann, Samuel. The Homœopathic Medical Doctrine, or "Organon of the Healing Art". Dublin: W.F. Wakeman. 1833: iii, 48–49. Observation, reflection, and experience have unfolded to me that the best and true method of cure is founded on the principle, similia similibus curentur. To cure in a mild, prompt, safe, and durable manner, it is necessary to choose in each case a medicine that will excite an affection similar (ὅμοιος πάθος) to that against which it is employed. Translator: Charles H. Devrient, Esq.
Shang, Aijing; Huwiler-Müntener, Karin; Nartey, Linda; Jüni, Peter; Dörig, Stephan; Sterne, Jonathan AC; Pewsner, Daniel; Egger, Matthias, Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy, The Lancet, 2005, 366 (9487): 726–732, PMID 16125589, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67177-2引用错误：带有name属性“shang”的<ref>标签用不同内容定义了多次
Paul S. Boyer. The Oxford Companion to United States History. [January 15, 2013]. ISBN 9780195082098. After 1847, when regular doctors organized the American Medical Association (AMA), that body led the war on "quackery," especially targeting dissenting medical groups such as homeopaths, who prescribed infinitesimally small doses of medicine. Ironically, even as the AMA attacked all homeopathy as quackery, educated homeopathic physicians were expelling untrained "quacks" from their ranks.
Hemenway, Henry Bixby, Modern Homeopathy and Medical Science, JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association, 1894, (11): 367, doi:10.1001/jama.1894.02420900001001
Hahnemann S, The Organon of the Healing Art 5th, aphorism 269, 1833, ISBN 0-87983-228-2.
Hahnemann S, The Organon of the Healing Art 6th, aphorism 270, 18421921, ISBN 0-87983-228-2
Yale University, Cushing/Whitney Medical Library. The logic of figures, or comparative results of homoeopathic and other treatments. Philadelphia, Boericke & Tafel http://archive.org/details/logicoffiguresor00brad. 1900. 缺少或|title=为空 (帮助)
A 12C solution produced using sodium chloride (also called natrum muriaticum in homeopathy) is the equivalent of dissolving 0.36 mL of table salt, weighing about 0.77 g, into a volume of water the size of the Atlantic Ocean, since the volume of the Atlantic Ocean and its adjacent seas is 3.55×108 km3 or 3.55×1020 L :
Emery KO, Uchupi E, The geology of the Atlantic Ocean, Springer, 1984, ISBN 0-387-96032-5
Shaw, D. M. Homeopathy is where the harm is: Five unethical effects of funding unscientific 'remedies'. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2010, 36 (3): 130–131. PMID 20211989. doi:10.1136/jme.2009.034959.
Altunc, U.; Pittler, M. H.; Ernst, E., Homeopathy for Childhood and Adolescence Ailments: Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials, Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 2007, 82 (1): 69–75, PMID 17285788, doi:10.4065/82.1.69, However, homeopathy is not totally devoid of risks… it may delay effective treatment or diagnosis
Malik, Imtiaz A.; Gopalan, Sethuraman, Use of CAM results in delay in seeking medical advice for breast cancer, European Journal of Epidemiology, 2002, 18 (8): 817–22, PMID 12974558, doi:10.1023/A:1025343720564, CAM use [in the developing countries this study solely considered] was associated with delay in seeking medical advice (OR: 5.6; 95% CI: 2.3, 13.3) and presentation at an advanced stage of disease
Cucherat, M; Haugh, MC; Gooch, M; Boissel, JP, Evidence of clinical efficacy of homeopathy. A meta-analysis of clinical trials. HMRAG. Homeopathic Medicines Research Advisory Group, European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2000, 56 (1): 27–33, PMID 10853874引用错误：带有name属性“pmid10853874”的<ref>标签用不同内容定义了多次
Linde, K; Scholz, M; Ramirez, G; Clausius, N; Melchart, D; Jonas, WB, Impact of Study Quality on Outcome in Placebo-Controlled Trials of Homeopathy, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1999, 52 (7): 631–6, PMID 10391656, doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00048-7
Rosenthal, Robert, The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results, Psychological Bulletin, 1979, 86 (3): 638–41, doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638
Milazzo, S; Russell, N; Ernst, E, Efficacy of homeopathic therapy in cancer treatment, European Journal of Cancer, 2006, 42 (3): 282–9, PMID 16376071, doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2005.09.025
Posadzki, P.; Alotaibi, A.; Ernst, E. Adverse effects of homeopathy: A systematic review of published case reports and case series. International Journal of Clinical Practice. 2012, 66 (12): 1178–1188. PMID 23163497. doi:10.1111/ijcp.12026.
Meta-analyses of studies comparing homeopathic remedies < 12C with placebo indicated a statistically significant (p < 0.05) WMD in favor of homeopathy on the time to first flatus.
Results. Combined analysis shows a duration of diarrhea of 3.3 days in the homeopathy group compared with 4.1 in the placebo group (P = 0.008). The metaanalysis shows a consistent effect-size difference of ∼0.66 day (P = 0.008).
A pooled analysis of two small studies suggests a possible benefit for clinical homeopathy, using the remedy asafoetida, over placebo for people with constipation-predominant IBS.Cochrane Database Syst Rev （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
The results of the studies as well as the case reports define a sufficient basis for discussing the possible benefits of homeopathy for patients suffering from fibromyalgia syndrome although any conclusions based on the results of this review have to be regarded as preliminary.
Forty percent of general practitioners in the Netherlands practice homeopathy. With over 100 homeopathic medical schools, homeopathy is practiced in India along with conventional Western medicine in government clinics. In Britain, 42% of general practitioners refer patients to homeopaths. [3] （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
Homeopathic medicine as a distinct system of medicine is recognised by law in Belgium (1999), Bulgaria (2005), Germany (1998), Hungary (1997), Latvia (1997), Portugal (2003), Romania (1981), Slovenia (2007) and the United Kingdom (1950). The laws in Bulgaria, Hungary, Latvia, Romania and Slovenia explicitly allow the practice of homeopathic medicine to medical doctors only. In Belgium and Portugal the law does not exclude non-medical practitioners, but has not yet been implemented. In Slovenia, although the law permits medical doctors to practise homeopathic medicine, the medical association withdraws doctors’ licenses if they actually practise it.[4] （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
Patient satisfaction with treatment did not differ between AGPs and HGPs but was highest for patients treated with homeopathic medications only.In France, homeopathy is widely accepted for the treatment of ILI and does not preclude the use of allopathic medications. However, patients treated with homeopathic medications only are more satisfied with their treatment than other patients.[5] （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
Plus précisément, un Belge sur deux fait confiance à ce type de médecine non conventionnelle, dite “douce” et qui représente pour lui une solution efficace sans effets secondaires et dont l'innocuité rassure. Une étude Ipsos réalisée au mois de mai dernier démontre, de fait, une utilisation et une fidélisation croissantes du nombre d'utilisateurs de médicaments homéopathiques en Belgique.[6] （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
Selon une étude Ipsos, plus de quatre Belges adultes sur dix utilisent l’homéopathie (45%), contre 29% des enfants, et 20% pour les animaux de compagnie, rapporte le quotidien belge Le Soir.[8]
Consumers already accept and use homeopathic medicines for self care, as evidenced by annual US consumer expenditures of $2.9 billion on homeopathic remedies.[9] （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）
-->American College of Medical Toxicology; American Academy of Clinical Toxicology, Five Things Physicians and Patients Should Question, Choosing Wisely: an initiative of the ABIM Foundation (American College of Medical Toxicology and American Academy of Clinical Toxicology), February 2013 [5 December 2013], （原始内容存档于2013-12-04）, which cites
Woodward, KN. The potential impact of the use of homeopathic and herbal remedies on monitoring the safety of prescription products.. Human & Experimental Toxicology. May 2005, 24 (5): 219–33. PMID 16004184. doi:10.1191/0960327105ht529oa.
i/ˌhoʊmiˈɒpəθi/[1]）为替代医疗的一种，被科学界认定是伪科学之一种并持续在科学界及支持者间引发争论[2][3][4][5]。顺势疗法认为，如果某个物质能在健康的人身上引起罹患某病的症状，该物质即可用来治疗此类疾病，此理论是“以同类来治疗同类”，也称为以同治同[6]。人类从19世纪中叶[7]起获取的科学知识都与顺势疗法相抵触，包括物理、化学、生物化学及生物学[8][9][10]等。顺势疗法方剂从生物化学的观点来看是惰性的，对所有我们已知的疾病都没有疗效，但顺势疗法认为疾病是源自于一种被山姆·赫尼曼医师命名为“病荫”的现象，与随后科学发现疾病源自于病毒及细菌的观点并不同，不过临床试验已经证实，顺势疗法方剂没有客观的疗效。[11][12][13]由于顺势疗法的理论令人难以相信，且该疗法缺乏可验证的有效性，以致其在科学界及医学界普遍被认为是不可信的。[4][14][15]
